The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-06-23
TIE TRIAL OF SHARP.
Testimony Elected Yesterday Concerning the
Bribery of New York Aldermen.

NEW YORK june 22-In the Sharp trial. this
morning the cross examination of ex-Aldermau
Waite was continued While Waite unde,
cross-examination ex-Alderman Miller, another
of the 'boodlers," was led into court to be in
readiness to appear witness
Mr. Bright, of counsel for the Broadway road,
was recalled. He testified that the scheme Of
the proposed road was submitted to his firm BY
Sharp and Foshay. and was elaborated by them.
He drew the mortgage to secure the bonds aftet
consultation with a client He refused to dis
close the clients name but said it was not
Sharp. There was no attempt at concealment
on the part of their clients.
Mr.. Nicoll asked the court to direct the wit
ness to produce two books in which are recorded
the daily transactions between the witness and
his clients, that he might be able to testify
to what took place between them. Mr. Parsons
said that as far Sharp was concerned there
was no objection and that Mr. Bright was alb
solved from any pledge of secrecy
Mr.. Bright said he was forbidden by law to
make such disclosures, and refused to do so.
Judge Barrett said he would rule on Mr..
Brieht's refusal later on.
Ex-Aldermap Milers presence in court started
the rumor that he had turned States evidence
and would testify against Sharp. Neither Dis
trict Attorney Martinenor ~. Nicol would say
whether this was true .,-ot Ex.Recorder
not turned informer. Mr. Smith had instructed
Mr.. Miller not to testify voluntarily.
Continuing his evidence, lawyer Bright I'D
mitted that he had draw up various documents
passed by the Council in connection with the
Broadway road franchise, and that he went to
the house of Judge Bartlett, of the Supreme
Court, at o'clock of the night before the early
morning meeting of aldermen and secured from
him order dssolving the injunction which re-
strained the board from granting the franchise
Lyddy the man who had procured the in
junction. and the witness showed Judge Bartlett
the evidence of Lyddys consent to Its dissoiu'
ton. When asked what passed between HIM
self and Judge Bartlett on that occasion, Mr..
Bright begged very hard. and with tears to be
excused from answering, but was forced to
do So He said Judge Bartlett expressed
tho opinion that the injunction should
have been granted. and questioned
the right of the court to enjoin legislative
body. The witness either limited mentioned
about an early meeting of the aldermen next
morning. He had a second interview with Judge
Bartlett about year ago. They talked over
what had occurred when the order had been
asked for. Judge Bartlett said that. had he
known of the early morning meeting. he would
never have signed the order. and said he was
much displeased that Mr. Bright had not told
him. In explaining his firms relations with
Moloney. he said they only knew him as the
clerk of the railroad committee. Nothing ever
passed between them except what they thought
right and proper. He visited their Office openly
and without concealmept. The witness knew or
no reason why his Office should be designated the
headquarters of conspiracy to bride the alder
men of 1884, nor why himself and Mr. ScriopeK
should be pronounced members of that conspir-
acy. Neither he nor Is firm. ne sald, nau any
thing to do with the call for the early morning
meeting of the aldermen
VIM. H. Miller who was a member of the
railroad committee of the Board or Aldermen OF
1884, was next called and took the stand. He
testified that he voted for the franchise and Mr..
Nicoll then asked him If he received anything
after the meeting from De Lacy another of the
ex-adermen who is now in Canada, and Miller
answered: II received So, 900 from De Lacy, at
his house after the passage of the franchise, in
$780, $500 and 81 900 bills" Afterwards he un-
derstood that the money was paid him under
some arran cement made with the aldermen and
he went to De Lacey and told him he would give
the money rack to him. and would not keep it.
I'm glad, tbs witness added. Ito have this OPP
portunity to GEAR myself of the stigma that has
attached to me-" Miller said he did not attend
the early morning meeting of the board, and
knew nothing of it until he read about it in the
papers that afternoon. He received no notice to-
attend. (
After hearing some further unimportant ts5
timony the court adjourned.